The Problem with Tech Media: Ego, Dogmatism, and Cult of Personality

[@ShankMods]

16:12 I was not made aware of the Hot Wheels case being sold before the auction, so at the moment at the convention it took me by surprise. But I think a key distinction here is that the hot wheels case was a gift I gave to them, and not something that was technically mine or on loan from me. Being a gift to LMG, it was their property to do what they want with it. While it would have been nice to be told beforehand, I don't think they had any obligation to inform me, and expecting them to do so isn't fair in my eyes. At the time, I was thinking it would have been cool to have kept the rear machined plate that Tynan and I worked together on to design for the build. But not long after, I was over it. I have several hot wheels PCs, so I'm not losing sleep over it. Someone got a really cool PC case from one of their favorite youtube videos, and the proceeds went to charity. Given that the charity was a pediatric hospital, and my SO is a pediatric nurse, I can't really be upset about that. My purpose for that case was served. I passed it onto a new home. When they no longer needed it, they did the same. I hope it is able to bring joy to the new owner.

[@TechTechPotato]

Thanks for jumping in the comments to confirm! :)

[@hyperbandit]

@@TechTechPotato Just out of curiosity, as it's now come to light, does the fact that Billet Labs initially told LMG they could keep the water block change anything? Yes they asked for it back and LMG agreed, but I could see it being marked in the system as "LMG property" in their inventory, and would have had to been manually changed to "return to vendor", which obviously did not happen which lead to the sale of the unit. But I do think it changes a bit of the narrative that Billet Labs was putting forward, as they seemed to specifically push on the fact that this was their sole prototype and they had lost valuable production time on. Seems strange for something they had never initially planned to get back.

[@reallunacy]

Thanks for the added information. I really enjoyed that collab video.

[@DigitalDependance]

Great clarification, I will also note that I believe Billet labs apparently initially told LMG they could keep it then changed their mind. From a legal point of view id imagine once you have possession and have been given permission to keep it, its then at your discretion to honor the gifting parties change of mind. (Ofcourse returning it most certainly is the correct and ethical thing to do). It appears LMG did agree to return it, but miscommunicated it internally and disposed of it by charity action. I was initially disgusted with how this played out, but if it is as described above then while unfortunate I think LMG acted in good faith and even although making an error have done what is necessary to remedy the error by reimbursing them for the item or offering to make attempts to retrieve it.Still, it highlights procedural errors and suggests that they should have all people/companies sending items sign some kind of material exchange order form stating the condition of the goods handling (gift, loan, loan period, disposal conditions etc)

[@DigitalDependance]

@@hyperbanditEXACTLY!

[@dcphillips1991]

One point I disagree with, the use of asterisks in videos. I think things like tech reviews are more audio than they are visual, so corrections may be missed if done via this method.

[@BenMagargee]

Absolutely! The majority of my KZbin "watching" is while doing other things, or while driving and my screen is completely off.

[@severeerror52]

I think a decent compromise would be having a clear audio cue whenever a correction pops up.

[@brandonthompson7075]

I disagree with your point, I actually prefer the asterisks in videos. I think putting audio or cutting the video with a short vid explaining where they messed up is a distraction from the entertainment point. Honestly if you take one video as your only source of info on a product is on the person watching. Anyone will get something wrong at some point. Im not defending Linus but I do believe they moved to more of a entertainment standpoint. People who look for purely information should not be trusting one video or source. Imo

[@feralkitty33]

1:28:00 Here I believe Steve may be referring to the comments smaller tech reviewers get when their numbers do not match what LTT has incorrectly posted. I know that HUB Mentioned this in their podcast.

[@Gulyus]

Which TTP also touched on in the video, earlier on. How LTT fans have...gone WAY too far on things. Specifically with regards to Madison and the talk beforehand.

[@Metal_Maxine]

LTT was getting lots of comments from people complaining his results/opinions don't match with GN's. It was interesting - he said he was giving his opinion and the more different/diverse opinions the better.

[@ExarchGaming]

HUB also said in that same podcast, despite the errors, their conclusions were in line with the rest of the tech media community.

[@ajajala5081]

No one is comparing LTt numbers to smaller reviews that's absolute bs

[@feralkitty33]

@@ajajala5081 smaller channels have outright said it! Listen to the hardware unboxed podcast that mentions it. I believe it is one of the first episodes

[@carmencrincoli]

Ian, an excellent video, but one thing I want to push you on: A corporation that explicitly sets its KPIs around a metric that generates bad results (even if in unintended ways)...and then DEFENDS that KPI because it is good for revenue and profitability, has still made a choice that harms its customers. The individuals do not necessarily have to view those actions as 'bad' or 'evil', but the outcome for the affected parties is the same. I agree that Steve's language was too emotionally charged to get that point across well, but I do think his core point stands, and I think you walked away from it a bit. (IMO)

[@elon6131]

I think that’s kind of missing the point of LTT. Not every piece of content needs to be a 100% accurate masterpiece, it’s always a tradeoff. LTT was very explicitly (especially before labs) putting entertainment value first. As long as they weren’t drawing completely unreasonable conclusions as a result (e.g. the mouse video - that’s bad), those mistakes don’t matter as much. (E.g. in the billet lab video. Imo, the point was to show off the cool tech, not measure its performance.) With Labs, they had started shifting that focus around, but that takes time to do properly and i suspect is one of the things the new CEO would have had to take care of either way.

[@alistairblak2633]

@@elon6131 Well if point was just to show off cool tech from Billet lab, they shouldn't then treat it as a review and bury it to the ground with their statements. Regardless of if the product was worth it or not, that was wrong.

[@nachiketmhatre7411]

@@elon6131 accuracy of testing is paramount, especially if you're planning to bash the product. LTT's testing was clouded by gross negligence. Forget poor data, they didn't even use compatible hardware. OP is absolutely correct in his assessment. Ian's focus on GN is baffling. Emotional or not, his indictment of LTT is absolutely correct.

[@elon6131]

@@nachiketmhatre7411 Did you even watch that video? it really wasn't about the performance. You don't always need accurate testing to draw correct conclusions. if you told me you had an antimatter drive, i wouldn't need to test it to know for a fact it's snakeoil and bash the hell out of it. I don't need to run detailed tests on Samsung's 300k USD "The Wall" TV to know it's a stupid product nobody should buy Some thing apply here. the ability a hunk of copper has to transfer heat away from the CPU into ambient temp water is limited by physics, and it simply is never going to justify 800$ for its performance. ergo, performance *doesn't fucking matter*. They were perfectly clear about two things: this isn't the kind of performance you can expect out of it on the proper GPU... and that even going by Billet's own numbers, you shouldn't buy this over a standard water cooling setup if your goal is performance. Like, stop misrepresenting the content just to make a point, it's gross (thanks GN!!) As for why the focus on GN? if you really fail to see the problem in the resulting online discourse which clearly needed addressing, you're not thinking about this clearly.

[@wile123456]

Also being emotional isn't bad, as long as its warranted. And in Steve's case he was correct about everything and that allows you to be emotional without it detaching from your arguements

[@dryphtyr]

As someone who has read many of your articles over the years, I think you're getting pretty good at these short format videos 😁

[@internaltext]

This definitely could've been a Tiktok :)

[@nopenope1]

And there I was, beeing proud of my self, watching this video from start to end in one run, and as the first and only screen! 😂 Brain damage from Shorts/Tiktok and for me more the pause button on everything, really does things.

[@bleachedsound]

34:49 A comment on "kind of like a research paper": Research papers provide abstracts in the beginning. A research paper never start off with the data. Furthermore, when you say " Steve's opinion", which definition are you referring to? "a view or judgement formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge or "a statement of advice by an expert on a professional matter." Even in the first definition, an opinion can be based on fact, and what is that called in a scientific paper? A hypothesis. (Defined as: a supposition or proposed explanation made on the basis of limited evidence as a starting point for further investigation). A hypothesis is in the beginning of the paper. Evidence / data is provided after.

[@octacilioalvares5879]

I disagree with one specific point: Does a bad LMG review hurt GN? I would say yes, not only GN but every other reviewer. Let's say a layman is looking to buy a GPU and searches for it on KZbin. Then he watches two videos, one from LMG and the other from another reviewer. There is clearly a discrepancy in the results. Which one will he trust, the 1M subscriber channel or the 15M one? After that point, the credibility of one is, at least, tainted.

[@TechTechPotato]

You'd hope that they'd check a third source if the first two disagree.

[@mapesdhs597]

@@TechTechPotato Hope is not a plan. :)

[@ArdgalAlkeides]

​@@TechTechPotato and you should know better than to expect that of the average person on the internet

[@jonasghafur4940]

@@mapesdhs597neither is assuming

[@jakedill1304]

He's open and honest about not being trustworthy.. that means you can trust him! Trust me...

[@TechTechPotato]

bro...

[@jakedill1304]

It hit me right as I was about to post.. but I chickened out.@@TechTechPotato

[@newtonchutney]

😂 🤣

[@CaseyHancocki3luefire]

🤣

[@danytoob]

Uh oh ... meme incoming

[@mobriskie]

I agree with some of your criticisms of Steve at GN, but as someone who is a consumer and has used LTT, GN, and Hardware Unboxed as a source to narrow down my choices when looking at getting a new CPU, MB, RAM, graphics card, or monitor I am concerned that as many errors as LTT/LMG were making it may have skewed choices I have made. At the end of the day they were still my choices to make and I realize that LTT is a bit more entertainment oriented but they do still portray a degree of “we know what we are doing” and I appreciate Steve @ GN at least shining a spotlight on the issues for the sake of other consumers like me. I also do not know if Steve would have been so harsh on LTT if LTT’s lab employee had not specifically called GN and Hardware Unboxed out in the lab tour video. Retaliation?? Perhaps so but he who casts the first stone should be sure he is on solid ground. The LTT employee was putting down GN and Hardware Unboxed while he was on weak footing. You stated that Steve can’t really qualify if any consumers or sales have been impacted by the LTT string of errors but I’d argue, as a consumer, that they have done their followers a disservice. In the end I hope LTT comes out better for it all. I am hoping for a positive outcome for them and the consumers.

[@KirkLazurus]

1:17:13 When Terren was hired by LMG, Linus mentioned on a WAN show that he was after Terren for a while because he had confidence in Terren from his NCIX days. Linus tried to hire Terren after NCIX went down but he had already accepted the offer at Dell.

[@AbbaHajou]

He's also said it's happened a few different times where he's wanted Terren but each time Terren had moved around and was newly out of LMG's price range.

[@KirkLazurus]

Yes.

[@teebles]

More on this specific comment around this time. I also think that the corporate experience that these veteran players in the industry is vital for the transition of LMG from small team to mid sized company. The processes evolved and decorum required in a large company differs greatly from a small one. "Bro culture" doesn't fly in larger companies with more diverse employees. The whole Madison situation in my opinion might not have happened had the new CEO been around at that time. We often forget that Linus and Yvonne fell into these rolls, along with other senior executives. Not because they had experience leading a team or seeing what CFO should do, but just doing the work to keep the lights on. Now with their company size hitting a critical mass it requires more structure and communication.

[@IdunRedstone]

It's so confusing as an old LMG fan to here people talk about hiring terren as CEO because of the original terren who was editor who worked there and quit not that long ago lol

[@tinsucevic]

​@@IdunRedstone It's even weirder to see it when people actively misspell their names. Terren is CEO guy and Tarran is the macro king

[@cromefire_]

This is the kind of scrutiny that should have actually been applied to this whole conversation from the beginning. From all parties.

[@donathartyan2566]

problem is that stuff like this takes a lot of time, and outraged people on social media prefer to react more quickly than this

[@CareBear-Killer]

​@@donathartyan2566 what you mean is that people want to be outraged about data inaccuracies, while they don't have all the data. I get initial talk, emotions, etc, but you have to be careful because you could be just as inaccurate as the data you're complaining about.

[@StrikeWarlock]

It was never going to happen until Steve did it because Linus was just too big. The fact that even HUB mulled on doing so after demands from their Discord kept piling but they couldn't do so is a testament to that. The only reason why GN was able to hit hard was because every assertion they had against Linus was backed up by receipts that were easily verifiable, whereas Linus just kept banking on trust and goodwill that he was simply losing more and more whenever he opened his mouth.

[@wile123456]

Meanwhile we have Coreteks pathetic video farming drama and him bringing up 2 year old twitter drama to feel like he is vindicated lol

[@darreno1450]

GN did the work and shined the spotlight on LMG. Without them none of this would have been given the current levels of scrutiny. That's why videos like these that try to play both sides come off as disingenuous. LMG was in the wrong period. And the take on the pwnage mouse screw-up is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. There was no excuse for it. They needed to upload another video, period. Steve was 100% in the right. I have the utmost respect for him because he had the b@lls to do what was right, unlike some others.

[@pkt1213]

I don't even think I finished the Billet Labs video LTT did. It was even more full of Linus's half-assed than normal. I honestly don't take LMGs reviews very seriously because of how often they do things in a half-assed way. As a result, I don't take labs number seriously either.

[@pkt1213]

I think Steve was mostly right, just pissed off too. I didn't see any of the stuff from LMG as malicious, just sloppy, rushed, and disorganized.

[@pkt1213]

I did think to myself, during LTTs secret shopper, that their evaluation of customer support was generous when it was finished.

[@pkt1213]

I don't have an issue with Linus being an investor in framework. I think they have a great concept and hopefully more companies will adopt some similar principles.

[@610jrod]

I've never heard Dr. Cutress curse so freely, it feels like hearing my parents curse for the first time.

[@dryster123]

Ian is the Billy Connolly of the tech reviewers.

[@NightRogue77]

It’s almost like some people understand words are just words, and sometimes certain words are called for and sometimes they aren’t, but only fascists try to dictate who should say what and when, when they aren’t even aggrieved in the first place.

[@610jrod]

@@NightRogue77 What? Who is that comment for?

[@zivzulander]

We need a a rap duo video with Paul from Paul's Hardware and Ian.

[@terbo2000]

Something that bothers me about the Asterisks type of corrections is sometimes there's no reason to include that clip at all. For the LTT video with the Alienware keyboard, the host was mistaken, and the correction was on-screen. But if the editors knew that line was incorrect, why include it at all?

[@SianaGearz]

They probably thought it was funny.

[@PapaVanTwee5]

@@SianaGearz I have a Perrex keyboard, and they have similar "printed" bits. Heck, I think my son's MageGee also has them. And that's okay, both are budget keyboards. Printed bits on an expensive keyboard comes off as cheesy, and yes, they needed to keep that in. When Linus said "stickers" I knew exactly what he meant.

[@bellinibaci]

They probably have main editors that "build" the video that may or may not have any idea about the topics involved. And then you have quality controll that checks content with script and/or has knowledge on the subject

[@Galf506]

Workflow issue. You can't go back and reshoot and recompose the video. So the only option to get the video out timely is an overlay correction. 90% of times it's just something small like a MSRP change or some other number so it's better to silence audio and overlay a fix than reshoot.

[@DizzyBusy]

Maybe that particular editor is a Discworld fan

[@ocpimport7935]

13:36 - "Prototype and GPU was requested to be returned twice and neither were returned", But you didn't add that at first they were told they could keep the prototype. Basically hey you can keep it, if you give us a favorable review. Because they only asked for it back because they got a bad review. This could have easily lead to a miscommunication, and labeling which then lead to it being in an area for items that could be auctioned off. "Right. We originally said you could keep it because we thought it would be good for you to have it for future builds - it wasn't so you could sell it (whether for charity or not). Then when Linus clearly didn't like it, we asked for it back and you agreed." So it didn't look like they really needed it back or really wanted it back so long as they were viewed favorably. People acting like this would be a death nail to the company clearly doesn't know the kinds of processes in play here. They clearly have the cnc code and other information to replicate it, just would be a material and machine cost at that point. Which would be less since they already had the tooling to do more later.

[@ZWingPK]

As someone who has been following AnandTech for a decade+, Dr. Cuttress saying "LMG shat the bed" is hilarious. I think its the deadpan delivery that elevates it even more. Wonderful video Ian, thank you.

[@TheKb117]

Dead pan delivery is so Brit🧐😂😍👍

[@fluphybunny930]

Guy has memory issues 🤣

[@ricardopieper11]

Talk about being anal with words

[@mesaber86]

Where is this vid?

[@thatitdood8593]

"LMG shat the bed" was why I stayed for the whole video.

[@mar2ck_]

42:28 I do this all the time, just smile impulsively even when not happy. It's like "I can't believe I even have to say this" kind of exasperated smile.

[@mromutt]

Yeah I do as well or laugh. Uncomfortable? Smile and laugh. Dont know what to say or how to react? Smile and laugh.

[@Mountain-Man-3000]

No no! Ian Cutress is a MASTER of human emotion and behaviours! Wait... What's his doctorate in again... OH NEVER MIND. He was definitely just placing his uninformed opinion in here again, while being "objective". So frustrating.

[@JamieChorley]

Tbh the whole thing is quite strange. No matter people's views on either side (because LMG clearly need to tighten up operations), to do what essentially amounts to a public takedown of a rival is a very hostile move from a business standpoint, and it's as if GN is taking the seemingly righteous stance of some sort of whilsblower. This "We're just doing what needs to be done" type mentality. But, we're it not for the labs video in which which LMG staff incorrectly spoke and mentioned Hardware Unboxed and GN, I don't know if this video would have ever been made. It's clear that was viewed as some degree of provocation, and Steve even states that they decided to let it slide on that occasion, but clearly not, because they chose to revisit the topic. When you operate in a public space, you know full well that the posting of a video like that has serious fall out, and If I put myself in the shoes on GN, I can't help but feel, at the bare minimum, I would reach out and say "We've seen these patterns emerging and are concerned. We wanted to bring it to your attention before we're prompted to report on it". And I've seen a few times the notion that LMG should almost be grateful, or that they should consider it an intervention, but at least from a business perspective, it would very difficult to view GN's actions not as a competitive attack. Even with them not monetizing their video, their profile will have significantly benefitted from it. And whilst I don't think it was some sort of move to eliminate a competitor from the space, I think anyone that believes you go about making a video like this without some sort of emotional motive is probably fooling themselves a bit. Honestly, at least from a business perspective, the lesson learned will almost certainly be to tighten up operations, and that competitors should be viewed as such, and not to be "pally pally" with them. There is literally no other market I can think of where doing what GN has done to a competitor would be considered acceptable practice, and tbh, I don't really like the tone it sets forward. Apply it to any other market and it seems Ludacris. Picture a world in which an independent shoe manufacturer runs an expose on another, but then tells you it's merely an intervention for the good of the shoe market and that they don't benefit from it. It's a very odd thing to do, no matter your thoughts on LMG.

[@haxie4516]

@user-bx4kj5le4u The fact remains that by their own admission, GN had the evidence for this for months before making the video, coupled with the fact that they purposefully chose to *not* mention it, and that they chose to *not* reach out (something they've done with basically every other of their "exposé" videos). By choosing to go this route, and not raising concerns at any point sooner, they contributed to the continued mistakes. They were following the words of Napoleon, "Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake". LMG absolutely needed to be called out. But that didn't suddenly become true a week ago. I hope LMG improves from this, and I hope that I may, one day, find their content to be trustworthy enough. They have made far too many mistakes, and it is indicative of a deeper issue in the organisation. What I don't get is why people are acting as if GN did this as some sort of community service. It clearly was not. Even if we disregard the monetization issues, and the channel growth, etc. It was still done as a hit piece. A hit piece that presented valid points, yes, and definitely a hit piece that will hopefully cause action to improve LMG, but a hit piece nonetheless. GN's video was only necessary because, by hoarding evidence and never once thinking "maybe I should say something", they made it necessary. GN has lost my trust, for now at least. Before I can trust them or their data again, they'll need to show that they are willing to work on themselves and their processes, and do better in the future. And at the very least, they need to learn that they are not beyond reproach, and that they make mistakes too. Maybe I'm expecting too much of them? I'd say probably not, especially if they continue to put out "journalism". Or it could be that you're guilty of the thing you suggested about the OP. Maybe you're too soft.

[@danburycollins]

Agree - really well put - both comments above actually.

[@JGnLAU8OAWF6]

Not to mention that most issues raised by GN were already know to LMG and they worked on fixing those.

[@thomasni123]

I've been following Anandtech and your reviews just as long as I've been following LTT. I remember checking the site every day after school to see if there was anything new, even if I didnt understand the more complicated topics at times. I'm glad you are still a voice within the industry. I didn't realise the nuances of presenting journalism and the different ways I have been influence.

[@Matlockization]

Journalists are very good at supporting the left side of politics. Which is clearly wrong. They never used to do this. They used to be neutral, maybe things will change back.

[@SasquatchsCousin33]

I still have Anandtech in my Favorites bar out of respect but they have suffered in the modern media landscape.

[@ttlayland]

Honestly unfollowed gamers nexus. The drama in order to climb the ladder is disgusting. Their fan base is cultish. Hate how he moves in the industry.

[@Matlockization]

@@ttlayland Some people are hooked on the ladder of drama while ignoring the bleeding obvious. God help those who can't help themselves.

[@ttlayland]

@@Matlockization truth

[@tekoreimante]

43:14 yes it does. GN discord server was always flooded with negative comments every time his data was different from LMG.

[@akashmakkar7187]

Dr. Ian is spending too much time on flights to really know what's happening in the real world, i.e. discord servers. Wink wink. Some of his critiques are laughable. I'm glad we have Steve. If nothing else, I respect GN and HUB even more now. HUB was vocal about VRAM criticisms even when I bought my RTX 3070 in spite of the criticism they got, and guess what, they were right.

[@AgentSquash]

@@akashmakkar7187 Discord servers are hardly the real world. Would like to see a genuine critique other than "I'm glad we have Steve".

[@FreshlinoSanchez]

Found the ltt dickrider​@@AgentSquash

[@paul_hankin]

LMG is at a classic "crisis of" stage in the Greiner Growth Model. As companies grow they encounter very predictable problems that then [should] force change upon the organisation.

[@wretchedslippage3255]

Thank fuck it did. I feel like their quality picked back up a bit and they tightened their shit up

[@PhilfreezeCH]

I agree with basically everything you said except some statements in Pt 6: Accuracy, Ethics and Responsibility. Lets get the easiest out of the way. At the end you say GN Steve offers two possible options, either the content is rushed or the team is unqualified and that he doesn't leave the door option to other options such as growth pains, miss-management, lack of QC etc. Personally I think this is non-point as I would include most of these things in the 'non-qualified' statement (except if Steve clearly states a specific team that isn't qualified). They are just failures of different teams, showing they are currently not well qualified to fully perform their job (here qualified not in the 'lack of degree' sense but in the 'lack of experience' way). Ultimately this is irrelevant though, its just wording. Now for the more important bit. I disagree with you that as long as the potential conflict of interest is stated in the video, the Framework investment is a non-issue. Additionally, you imply that as long as companies send their laptops this indicates they are still okay with it and that they are the best arbiters. For the first thing, a general audience is not very good at judging how a conflict of interest can influence reviews or how severe this is. Especially since you almost influence them into thinking it is a non-issue by letting Linus continue to host these videos (a person may assume that if LTT is fine with it, then the conflict of interest may not matter). I think this conflict of interest does represent a serious issue, specifically if Linus is the host of these videos (and he has hosted laptop reviews after his investment, I checked). Generally a pro-active recusal is considered best practice, in fact Linus is aware of this and I remember the WAN-show poll where he asked the audience what he should do. There he said he should probably not host these videos anymore (if I remember correctly the audience voted that he can still host but polling a likely loyal part of your fanbase is improper in itself). Personally I would consider this issue to be resolved if he stopped hosting the videos. As far as I know he is personally invested (not LMG is invested) so this recusal would make sure no or minimal involvement from the party with potential conflicts of interest. Second, companies will send their laptops as long as they expect a positive ROI from the review. This might still be the case even if the review is not totally fair as LTT has a large audience and even a biased review can still be positive overall. So the laptop makers are in fact not the best judge here at all. As per the seperation between church and state (content and ads), I agree that in general this is pretty good. However, especially on Short Circuits they do sometimes mention that a device was given to them by the company etc. This indicates at least some awareness from one side to the dealings of the other. A much larger issue however is their secret sponsor shopper. Personally I think if you compare their treatment of Dell in this video compared to how they previously treated other computer-builders in previous secret-shoppers, it is quite easy to spot that the scale was not the same. Dell was treated far more nicely, especially in the conclusion (number of stars). I am inclined to say this is a small minority of their videos and as such it does not matter, however, both indicate that the seperation inside might not be as clean as we are let to believe. So we actually cannot really tell how much of a conflict of interest this is overall. Another point, this time on the Pwnage mouse video. I think one the biggest issues there is how it was handled. First the error wasn't acknowledged, then they did and edited out the segment talking about how well it glides. However, the conclusion is now left untouched with no statement as to wheter this would impact their conclusion or not. This is a no-go for me, even if this does not influence your conclusion, this must be clearly stated. Another another point, at the end, I think what GN Steve was talking about with having to tip-toe around LTTs mistakes (and probably also why he thinks its damaging to the space) is that if their numbers do not agree, they (GN) are accussed of publishing wrong numbers. This is something HUB Steve also talked about in his new podcast. If the numbers disagree with LTT, most comments will be about that and most will assume LTT is correct. This is likely because of two things: LTT has a larger audience and they have recently started to brand themself using Labs and the 'objectivity' this gives them. While I agree that the way GN Steve said it was over-generalized and he shouldn't have spoken for everyone, I do think he has a point there (at least HUB seems to agree, so its not like he is the only one). Final point, yes, not everyone should be held to the same standards but everyone should be held to the standards they explicitly claim or just imply. LTT has of recent made quite a lot of reference to Labs and how this has professional level equipment with professionals producing professional tests and high-quality (objective) numbers. So they have started to market themself with objctivity as a plus-point of them. For me this means we can (and should) hold them to this standard. I assume you have dealt with testing labs (like UL) before. In my opinion, if you go about marketing Labs the way LTT did, I would expect professionalism more in-line with UL than with your typical KZbin hardware-reviewer (at least from a data perspective, obviously the script on the LTT channel themself will be less that, but the data should be rock solid). This is simply not the case, I have worked in an electronics testing lab before and even small errors we noticed always caused retractions and usually ended with us testing a product again (for free of course) and if it happened to often we would probably have gone bankrupt. If LTT or rather Labs does not want to be held to such a standard, which is obviously fine, then they should be more careful with how they market themself. At the moment they seem to be no more accurate, reliable or expansive in their testing than the likes of GN or HUB so they have to be careful to not imply otherwise.

[@crazybeatrice4555]

One thing I dislike about this whole saga is that I'm not informed enough to tell whether people are being accurate or inaccurate about these topics.

[@mapesdhs597]

Indeed, and worse, the pressure to come to a particular stance about Madison when by definition we not only cannot have all the facts, more importantly it's not our place to judge at all. If her claims enter the criminal realm then the process should not commence via social media, it is rather a police matter, and should have been at the time, not ages later amid the public sphere.

[@akashmakkar7187]

Only Steve brought receipts. This doc is also just giving his opinions, some incredibly dubious ones, such as scrutinizing Steve's intention behind smiling. That in itself is just laughable to me as a neurodivergent person.

[@hassaan3861]

Why not do your own research? If you haven't been following them before, why do it now? If you *were* doing that, why not corroborate your suspicions with facts that you do know?

[@MJ-uk6lu]

I would rather still be a bit suspicious about this whole mess. I find it really odd that so many youtubers started massive anti-LTT video marathon. I just find it weird, especially when initial complaints were just inaccurate reviews and poor handling of criticism, which is not even that uncommon. It's every-day occurrence on review medias. Even GN occasionally makes some idiotic conclusions and ignores feedback. Also it wasn't even remotely unknown that LTT productions is highly rushed, they were indeed quite transparent about that all the time. Madison drama was unexpected and genuine shit stain, however it seems to be isolated to one manager's inappropriate behaviour. Billet labs drama seems to be unethical management at LTT, perhaps even amateurish one, fair point, but still everyones now talking about LTT like they are murderers. I just find it stupid. If LTT is really so very awful why nobody has sued them? Instead of being armchair detectives, let actually qualified people assess them and fine them if needed. I could offer so much criticism about almost every bigger techtuber, they do wrong things rather often and it's no secret, but what is weird is that LTT is being shat on so suddenly. Anyway, did anyone actually properly retested that Billet labs block? If not, then this is even more cringe.

[@INSTINCTXIV]

@@MJ-uk6lu Also not getting both sides of the story to make accusations really made me question GN's intention, company miscommunications happens A LOT and this situation really didn't have to go public other then the bad review/showcase.

[@locarnus255]

21:28 Presenting the conclusion that this part of his 1:34:55 video is the most important, long before talking about all the other parts of his video... 35:35 Critizing Steve for presenting a conclusion before establishing all his arguments...

[@droknron]

I take criticism with your take on the short circuit unboxing of the pwnage mouse because they introduced Labs data to backup their claims about it not being smooth in that video. This means this wasn't just an unboxing, it went through some analytical testing and at least a minimum of two people and probably more, I would say this is closer to a review than an unboxing at this point. The rest of the video is sound. I do think Gamers Nexus were disingenuous in some of their claims and the mixing of opinion and facts does confuse the viewer somewhat. I think it's clear that Steve decided to make the video only once that tour happened where GN and Hardware Unboxed were unjustifiably compared to Labs as being inferior by Tim. So there was a motive here to do it and I think a lot of their points could even be applied to their own videos if you look hard enough for mistakes and if you included all of those little mistakes in one collage it would look pretty bad too. That doesn't absolve LTT of course, they're a big company now and need to put on their big boy pants, stop doing things so slap-dash and when they know something is bad, push it out to viewers anyway to maintain their video release schedule, this is something I agree with GN on, motives notwithstanding: LTT has on a number of occasions hit the "just send it" button even when there are glaring issues. You can even watch some of the Floatplane exclusives (I'm a subscriber) where they show behind the scenes on some videos and Linus will say things like, no we're not doing that it'll take too long or "we're already setup lets just continue" etc - And I'm not even talking about the Billet Labs video, I've seen this in behind the scenes vids on FP for other content twice.

[@SianaGearz]

Labs failed to remove mouse foot covering as well, didn't it? Was it possibly the same mouse that first went to labs and then to the show filming? The pinned comment with a recent edit indicates that there's nothing terribly wrong with the feet or the glide feel, that it's about what you expect of PTFE. As a consumer you might not think of it at first but that tape will start coming off after a day or two of normal use and then you turn it over and find that you have loose PE tape curling up on the feet, and you pull it off. What is your reaction then: "OMG it's so horrible, the manufacturer should have marked it up more clearly, i will not recommend anybody buy this mouse based on this horrible experience". Or "Well that's a little dumb of them and me both, but pleasant surprise that the mouse is running better now". I think something to keep in mind that some products are highly subjective/personal. If this mouse has the SHAPE that you feel comfortable with and the look and materials that you like and there's nothing terribly terribly wrong with it, then it makes no sense to say that everyone should be buying a different product instead, which is an implication behind a negative review. That same thing applies to the Billet Labs cooler, there may be half a dozen people in the whole world who necessarily want a cooler that is pressed in between an 90ti and a CPU for a super compact high-power build which saves a small fraction of a litre of build volume, but if they do, there's no alternative to this product, and it doesn't have to compete with a $300 waterblock for performance, it just needs to work adequately.

[@FinalSentinel]

Well put

[@StereoTyp0]

Your statement about speaking out against a more powerful party did not mince words. That was very much appreciated.

[@Xdgvy]

Interesting take. I'm not going to wast either of our times trying to figure out where my opinions end and facts begin, so I'll skip the 'fight in the comments' response and just thank you for the amount of time and effort that went into this. It was nothing if not enlightening.

[@jgorres]

"If you start marketing your business on accuracy, and data, and objectivity..." Yes, you absolutely should be held to a standard of accuracy, and data, and objectivity. LMG has entered into this review space willingly with the addition of "Labs", and they're begging their audience to trust them explicitly when they have "Labs" involvement in a content piece. For these videos they deserve any criticism garnered as they are no longer just "entertainment"!

[@budluo]

Thanks for the video. Thoughtful and fair. I watched LTT Tech Tips for years but started to feel they have been stretching a bit thin lately. Presenters appeared to being stressed out, including Linus. When they produced so many videos, I could not follow up, and instead end up not watching that much. I would like to circle back to see how they respond.

[@cldpt]

Another small hypocrisy (which I hope you take it as a pedantic, but fair jab): at the start of the video you mention LMG reached out before the video but in the spirit of fairness, you wouldn't be including content from any clarifications. At around 1:20:00 you seem to imply the conversation between you and LMG's new CEO happened in this context of a pre-publish reach out. But maybe you can clarify if that was the case or not. If it was, I don't think it's at all fair to include this apologetic short segment in this otherwise very methodic approach to your piece.

[@TechTechPotato]

That was a minor conversation several weeks ago. Apologies that wasn't explicitly timelined, but yeah, I haven't included any comments as part of any pre-publish reach out.

[@__aceofspades]

I dont know what it is, but after a certain point of growth it seems like all PC tech reviewers start having ego issues. Linus being the current discussion (again), but Jayz has had his fair share of beefs on twitter, Steve (GN) picking on /r/hardware Reddit comments, and Steve (HUB) on twitter and YT comments. It's there for all of them if you know where to look. Maybe its the environment, having fan bases and companies that regularly throw shade at each other, and the toxicity just seeps into the reviewers.

[@Iridiumcosmos]

I noticed Steve (GN) also had a habit of being negative about certain products in the past. I’m not sure if he still carries that trend nowadays. HUB needs to stop letting the fanboys get to them. That’s my biggest problem with them.

[@shooterrick1]

@@Iridiumcosmos I think that defaulting to negativity and scepticism is a good approach in this capitalistic hellscape we live in.

[@Kavurcen]

Let's be real, any random fistful of white nerd men has always been this way.

[@profosist]

Just so you know I just fight everyone, even myself!

[@Freestyle80]

No one cares about what GN and HUB does cuz they are small, anything Linus does is painted as pure evil and malicious Be more objective people, GN isnt actually jesus and HUB is tried to grow with bad clickbaits such as 'IS THIS THE END OF INTEL??' and when that backfired they stopped. Marketing to r/pcmr is not a good idea :) LTT needs to improve their reviews but they don't need to change their content, they arent meant to be 100% serious channel.

[@OhhCrapGuy]

13:30 an important aspect of the billet labs debacle is that it has been described as a $800 waterblock. This is a drastic misrepresentation. It is, in fact, two combined waterblocks at $400 each, which is fairly close to the price of a pair of high-end EKWB CPU and GPU waterblocks, tubing, and fittings to cool the same devices. Since this also provides the ability to sandwich both devices much closer than may otherwise be possible, the $800 price point is not really that unreasonable.

[@emlyndewar]

Linus poor comments damaging company/product reputation. What else is new? 😂

[@Steamrick]

A $800 price point can be defended, but only if you really stretch. With a 'normal' custom loop, you only need to pay the $150~$300 for a new GPU cooler when you upgrade. A new $800 waterblock every time the GPU changes? Ouch. (I'm disregarding CPU mounting system changes, since they're comparatively rare.) There not existing a case that you can reasonably build such a system inside makes the product infinitely harder to recommend. Billet Labs even references the issue on their own website in this sentence snippet: "the MonoBlock creates the ideal setup for custom cases". It's not really a market viable product at any price point as it stands right now. You cannot finance R&D on the amount of people that are willing to build their own custom case to accomodate an extremely pricy custom block that'll have to be changed out with every GPU upgrade. This is a product only applicable to people with more money than sense that are also extremely enthusiastic about custom water cooling. That's not many.

[@thedoctor16]

Linus exercised confirmation bias. This is too expensive and no one needs this = POS and when he tested it and it didnt work his bias was confirmed even while he installed it wong and used a GPU with the mismatched geometry. $100,000,000 company reputation hit for $500--his valuation (on both accounts I suspect).

[@Mountain-Man-3000]

30:40 This point is nonsense. Steve could have put it on a brand new channel but the point of the video is to point out LMG's flawed review practices to his core audience. So how is he going to spread the word of this random new channel with one video? He would have to do it on his existing channel. Would you start a brand new newspaper or TV news channel because you had a story that might upset people?? Of course not. Did YOU start a new channel to address all this drama, or are you also getting some benefit from it? This is a poor argument and I'd urge you to think more critically before you speak in future.

[@toggtlas7099]

Of course it's nonsens, this guy is a bad-faith actor. If you want to criticize LTT just do it on some brand new channel where no one will ever see it. I am very smart and fair btw. But hey the act worked, he is worshipped in the LTT subreddit now.

[@haxie4516]

​@@toggtlas7099 Lmao. You're saying that about Dr. Cutress. Yeah, im sure he'd destroy his reputation and entire career over some squabble between two company owners acting like spoilt brats.

[@RichardTheRoe]

@@haxie4516 "His reputation". My man. This guy have no reputation to uphold. A very very small niche people likes him and that about it. He is a tiny fish in a small pond. And clearly he isn't above doing these horrible drama videos trying to keep the golden touch of Linus. Maybe you should pay more attention to the thing he is saying rather than assuming his name holds some value, yes?

[@haxie4516]

​@@RichardTheRoe I'm not assuming his name has value. I'm basing my views on evidence and facts. I thought your lot were obsessed with that sort of thing? Dr. Cutress is well respected in the field. Your insistence otherwise doesn't change the objective facts of the matter.

[@RichardTheRoe]

@@haxie4516 Sure you did. You were very much arguing that he couldn't possibly be posting a drama video full of horrible takes because he is Dr. Cutress. He got a reputation. And I'm saying no, he does not. Further more you didn't even try to argue the point you were replying to. You directly went for "It's Dr. Cutress". As if that meant something.

[@joemoffitt9044]

Very well stated Ian. Well done. Speaking of honest mistakes, I noticed that when discussing billet labs situation you reference the writer as being Alex( 36:35 ). The writer on the project was Adam Sondergard.

[@ADeadMansSpaceSuit]

better tell GN after all they need to call someone else out to keep those views up

[@davidmiller9485]

@@ADeadMansSpaceSuit with that comment we now know why your space suit didn't save you... Snark.

[@ColinM9991]

​​@@ADeadMansSpaceSuitvery ironic that you post a comment like that on a video like this. Clearly it has gone over your head. Play 0:24:37 on repeat. Just like 1 or 2 seconds of that. That part applies to you.

[@ADeadMansSpaceSuit]

@@ColinM9991 I know clearly people can't grasp a joke. I better take a week off to reflect upon my actions and improve on them.

[@Real_MisterSir]

@@ADeadMansSpaceSuit "there is a bit of truth underpinning every joke". It's not the "joke" part that people don't understand. It's the basis of the joke that is just weird at best, misinformed at worst. Considering GN has great view stats, the basis of your comment is rooted in false data, undermining the joke itself and making it unfunny as a result.

[@alirobe]

Thanks Dr Cutress! been waiting for your considered take on this whole situation and watching your twitter interactions with interest. Nobody is perfect when it comes to professionalism online, but in my mind your input has always been very helpful in coming towards a more objective viewpoint.

[@runninginthe90s75]

According to GN shills LTT is doo doo But GN is "based". While actually both of them are in the wrong. I'm glad to see someone like Dr Ian have balls to called out GN bias.

[@locarnus255]

41:30 Critizes Steve for "telling the audience what to think". In his next sentence tells the audience what to think.

[@Mountain-Man-3000]

His condescension is immeasurable. And infuriating.

[@steveheist6426]

Circa 1:28:00 - I *think* the point was that LTT's audience is larger and overlapping with GN's, and that the concern is that correcting the data in the smaller reviewer's content will have either reduced efficacy or issues with negative audience reaction because of expectations set by the LTT content. I wouldn't be surprised to learn of a particularly devout group that would take great displeasure at LTT being "wrong" in that way, but I would also imagine that that group is far smaller than GN seems to imply.

[@thomasphillips885]

Hardware Unboxed mentioned that people complain that their numbers don't match LTT, so maybe GN experiences the same thing? And he got frustrated that people say GN has wrong numbers?

[@crisp-waffle]

Halfway through the video, really happy with your take on this. Appreciate a level-headed, measured response!

[@am53n8]

A very good video and definitely interesting to watch. LMG undeniably has issues, but some things about Steve's video also felt off to me. Some of that definitely makes more sense to me now

[@Xdgvy]

Steve, as much as I like his content, is a muckraker. He knows what sells, and giving people a target sells buckets. That doesn't mean he is wrong- far from it -but it does mean that, when all is said and done, you will be mad about the wrong things.

[@jajssblue]

I'm really happy to see you weigh in on this. I really appreciate your candid and clear tone so far!

[@absolute1205]

So I do have some issues with your video on how you are judging others. This may end up a little long winded. I am also a new comer to your content and I have a strong bias against people who treat conclusions as more important than the methods used to generated the data for them. I'll making comments as I go. 1. In Ground rules (2), You state that some people view certain points about the story as black-and-white and how this is the wrong way to view reality. But in Ground rules (3) you make a black-and-white distinction between Linus, LTT and LMG (similarly with Steve and GN) when Linus is the owner of all 3. For some reason this black-and-white distinction is okay but others aren't??? Having this back to back was a bit jarring. The vast majority of problems can become black and white, but appear grey when you don't give nuance and/or allow for multiple answers to the problem. 2. You mention that Madison was scared to comment on her experience because of the fans, I hope that this video keeps in mind that this logic can also apply to Steve/GN since LTT and LMG is MASSIVE in comparison. So I expect this to be mention later as part of the perspective. 2. Pt 0.1 - The way you phrased the storyline communicates that Steve's comments about "not being mentioned in the WAN Show" was after LTT's apology video. It wasn't. This being in the first part of the intro indicates that the rest of the video has a good chance of being off tilt due to a not understanding the timeline (a.k.a. bad data). 3. Pt 0.2 - you add a personal comment of "wondering why Steve would add a comment about the call out when his video isn't about that???". This comment goes against your position of going into excruciating detail. What you're actually doing right now is priming your audience to accept your take that Steve handled this incorrectly while presenting it as factual. **NOTE** It's annoying that these comments are in the intro. If you're going to mention it then explain it. These questions to make people wonder about Steve's intentions come off as you being an disingenuous reporter. These same tactics are used by people to promote misunderstanding others. To put it shortly, you're coming out the gate, questioning Steve and nitpicking his actions, but when specifics first pop up, you don't explain why said action is problematic, you try and get your audience to "wonder why Steve would do this" 4. 30:43 - Your suggestion wouldn't prevent Steve from gaining financially benefit. Just lower his audience. It may also be perceived as hiding, which is something he doesn't seem to do. He's done pieces on other company's before on his channel, why would this one be different? This is bad advice when you look at what Steve's done in the past. 5. 31:39 - Your technical detail needs to be accurate regardless of deep you go dive. People going into different depths will talk about different things or provide different levels of technical detail. BUT w/e technical details you share, they need to be accuracy to the level that you dive. Your style of communication is irrelevant to this. So if you're going to the detail of how a game preforms by measuring framerates. The values of your framerates needs to be accurate. Again, your style of communication wont change this. 6. Pt. 1 Rushing - Does Steve give the data later? Injecting opinion before providing data isn't a big deal if the data is still given to back up those opinions. The problem is when you don't have that data at all. Research papers have these things called abstracts that the beginning of the paper. These effectively give the conclusion of the paper at the start. Just because the elements are in a different order, doesn't mean ulterior motives are present. It's a stylistic choice. **This is another "Black-and-white" thinking you have. Informative information must be presented in X way. Stylistic choices only start to have ulterior motives when omission is occurring. 7. Pt. 2 Accuracy and Data to Mislead - Linus has never back down on the notion that the water block was useless. He's back down in saying he should have tested it again, but, as far as i'm aware, his conclusion still stands. - You need to take into account the tone Linus had about this issue, and his way or the highway, and other issues that gives reason for Steve to have his position. Most of Steve's problem is his opinion. But he backs that up with evidence. Ethics is an opinion on how other people should behave and associated reasons for why that should be the case. So Steve's stance on ethics, logically, must also an opinion. Opinions with evidence backing up their reasoning are still opinions, just strong reasonable ones. Your framing of Steve's stance as an opinion to reduce legitimacy has no standing, as you've provide no evidence to counter Steve's evidence, Steve's reasoning or Steve's opinion on the Ethics of making people think you've tested something more thoroughly than you actually have. *********** I wanted to finish this but I don't feel like this video will turn course. I might revisit it later. TLDR: You start off on the wrong track with a misunderstanding of events followed by priming the audience by alluding to Steve's intentions without stating or explaining your opinion on those intentions. You're coming out the gate, questioning Steve and nitpicking his actions, but when specifics first pop up, you don't explain why said action is problematic, you try and get your audience to "wonder why Steve would do this". You don't understand that ethics is opinions on how people should behave. You use Steve communicating these opinions before providing evidence as some misstep of Steve's own values. Since judging Steve by his own standards is your angle, its a hard case for the video to add value when "what ethics is" isn't understood. There's probably more and there's probably things that Steve actually did wrong, but the content is enough off tilt that I would have to do my own digging for things that were found questionable.

[@VictorPaun]

well said!

[@absolute1205]

*********************EDIT: Watching more******************************** 8. Does bad LMG hurt GN - Has there ever been a situation where someone in an industry hurt the representation of EVERYONE in that industry? The answer is yes. It's happened in the medical field (ALOT). It's happened in the Sciences. And it's usually about misrepresenting data or hurting others and not caring about it. I don't understand how you, who has a doctorate, could not understand this. This why they have ethic researching practices, to help prevent the public from disregarding the validity of ALL research. *Major note up to this point* - You seem to have a rigid idea (third instance of black-and-white thinking) of how things should communicated, and if they're not done to the letter, the message is tainted. Ignoring any context that may change how you go about communicating an idea. You were right about needing to call out your hypocrisy. 9. Right to reply - ... you claim to have watched the videos but still ask the question: "I would like to know why Steve didn't reach out". HE EXPLAINED WHY!!! HE DIDN'T REACH OUT BECAUSE THEY HAVE A LARGER MEDIUM PLATFORM THAN HE DOES AND THE INFORMATION HE PUT OUT WAS PUBLIC. IN ADDITION, LINUS HAS A HISTORY OF IGNORING LEGITIMATE COMPLAINTS, SINCE THIS IS A MAJOR COMPLAINT, YOU COULD BE UNDERCUTING THE INFORMATION BY INFORMING HIM AHEAD OF TIME. ALSO GN HASN'T CONTACTED EVERYONE HE'S DONE A PIECE ONE. It's in bold you you maybe don't miss the public information next time you do one of these. Also shows your lack of integrity of presenting the facts of the story. 10. A claim of Objectify - the fact that Steve doesn't present information in "All facts"->"All opinions" template doesn't mean he's not trying to be as objective as possible. It just means you're having trouble picking up when he presents evidence of whats going on and when hes talking about conclusions. In case you don't understand, objectivity typically applies to evidence, opinion applies to conclusions. You have a background in scientific publishing but I'm starting to question your general understanding of the scientific process. You seem to lack the ability to parse information, pay attention to details and maintain a consistent narrative (black-and-write is typically wrong). 11. Break down of LMG - Gray is mentioned as being a former employee of ASUS because LMG has had questionable coverage of ASUS products recently. You seem a bit annoyed that Steve didn't point out how Gray has benefited the industry in the past. However you didn't show how this would eliminate Bias from Gray. So omitting it can't be a good or bad thing. But you including it muddies the waters. - You are just interpreting everything Steve says, or doesn't say, in the worst possible light. ASUS sponsering LTX is more reinforcement of not saying anything bad about ASUS, not that Gray had some personal say in the matter. Its all about how ASUS is intertwined with LTT and how, in Steve's view, that led to a soft board review. -But I guess you're right that he didn't back up the soft board review CONCLUSION, with evidence. But again, conclusions align more with opinions than objectivity. Something I wish you understood. 12. The review process - Steve's position is for LTT to slow down so that they can go more in-depth during the review process. Not just slow down for the sake of it. How could you have not understood this? He says this... Multiple times. **Note** You're making strong conclusions while ignoring/omitting/forgetting aspects of the videos. One of the things Steve brought up about LTT. I dislike when people come at a subject, using there history and title as reasons for authority on the subject but clearly haven't read or remembered details about the specific situation they are taking about. 13. Complexity of benchmarking - LTT labs is having such difficultly with obtaining good data, which is understandable, then THEY SHOULDN'T BE REPORTING IT. Conclusions bad on bad data is bad. As someone who has a PhD, you of all people should understand this. There should be validity testing that compares the old way and the new way to make sure its withing margin of error, but still report the old until bugs get smoothed out. **note** With review process and now this, it seems like you are trying to paint a picture that the review process is so hard that you should excuse conclusions made from bad data. Conclusions made from bad data is bad because you've misinformed your audience about the truth. Excusing this behavior shows you have little to no integrity about data collection and really shouldn't be judging people who do have standards or scientific process in general, which is based on data collection. 14. Cost are different - The direction is continued from previous note - "videos are expensive to make so audience should accept bad data". - Steve's back plate comment is the first time I've agreed with your assessment of the situation. Plus 1 for that.

[@absolute1205]

15. Accuracy, Ethics and Responsibility - Oh boy, this will be a big one 15.a) Conflict of interest doesn't mean there's a bias. Gray has a conflict of interest with ASUS because he used to work there. However he may not have any actual bias towards or against them in reporting. Conflict of interest is simply that your current interests conflicts with an interest you previously had in the past. Typically in the context of employment or personal relationships. An actual bias means you are presently acting on that conflict. 20 seconds in and you're already off tilt. 15.b) LTT's target group is the typically viewer, not Laptop manufactures, Same with Steve's audience. Not mentioning Laptop manufacturers as the most hurt isn't necessary or even true. If im taking advice from someone, them giving bad advice for their own benefit can be considered to hurt me more since I have a smaller voice than a manufacture. 15.c) Linus does make it seem like he's on every decision. But more importantly, he seems like he can stop any decision. He stopped his wife from owning 50/50 of the company. He stopped the suggestion of reshooting the water block, hes stopped working with advertisers. Just because the bias isn't in your face and obvious, doesn't mean its not there. 15.d) You seem to have a personal problem with people pointing out veterans of an industry can have bias. Steve makes this point because Linus that started his own thing because he didn't like how they, big companys did things. So hiring them to run certain teams is something to take notice of. 15.e) Interesting how you're again asking the audience a rhetorical question that actually needs an answer or evidence. "Do you REALLY think....". You're off target when you rhetorical ask the audience to fill in the gaps when you're claimed goal is to provide an assessment on Steve's behaviors. If you want to draw parallels you should provide relevant clips of Steve to indicate what you're doing. Right now it just seems like you don't like it with people question figures you respect. 15.f) qualifications - This is why you probably should have reached out to Steve before positing this. You DON'T understand his position nor have evidence stating what it is, make an assumption about what it is, job titles unsurprisingly, and then based a conclusion on that. While Steve did not reach out to Linus, he had PUBLIC statements on what Linus's position was. Once again, You show a lack of understand of context on this situation despite researching it. - The "gate keeping" is about boasting how much better your data is than everyone else's, NOT what's more or less technical. If you're gonna take that shot, don't miss. Otherwise everyone is gonna come after you. Linus and his team were just dumb enough to sell that message and miss. - The key isn't experience, its being capable of learning from mistakes. One mistake you're making now is not understanding Steve's position and not wanting to talk to him about what it is. Whatever research you did, it wasn't enough. 15. g) Steve boiled the issue down to the people at LMG are either unqualified or don't have enough time. The other possible explanations (growth pains, mismanagement, flux of labs vs other testing or lack of QA) are all caused by what Steve mentioned. Those things you've mentioned on expliations but they offer no insight on how to solve the problem. How do you solve growth pains? slow down or get people who are good at sorting out problems quickly and effectively. How do you solve mismanagement? hire someone who can manage or give your current managment more time to deal with problems. How do you solve the influx of lab data? Give them time to sort out and verify the data they're generating is correct. How do you get better QA? hire people who know the issues better or give the current staff more time to parse through videos. You're solutions do not solve anything, just point at something to blame. 16. Pwnage - The Steve's ding is fine. If you're going to test the obvious selling point, Inspecting that point before testing to ensure data generated is good, is an important step. But at this point, I feel like you don't care about good data and making sure your peers generate good data. Because again, if a major peer generates bad data, and you don't inform the audience that it's bad, that bad data is a stain on your whole section of the market. - again, feels like you're being willfully ignorant of the context of the situation and the position of LTT in this space. - you claim of Steve making mountains out of molehills but less than 60 seconds ago you acknowledge that the low friction of the mouse is the most important aspect of the mouse and thus should be evaluated. if you don't realize, this is an example of ignoring a data point (feet of the mouse are the most important aspect of this mouse) in order to make a conclusion(Steve is unfair in assessment of the mouse). You shouldn't call people bad faith in an discussion but damn.

[@Herio7]

1:22:22 It's far from making mountains out of mole hills. It's gaming premium mouse advertised as smooth for it to be as rough as presented by LMG is literally dealbreaker. It's one of the most important qualities. Seems so bad that it basically invalidates everything else after all what's the point of perfect ergonomics, impeccable accuracy or top-notch software if mouse doesn't moves at all. It's bottleneck for most other features. LMG also planted a seed of distrust about whole company, customers might logically think if they lie so much about "buttery smooth" what else do they lie about/exaggerate. There will be people that watched LTT video, seen it's 'NO' and decided to not buy it because of it. It's egregious error not because it's stupid in hindsight (I haven't had that hindsight feeling from Nexus video anyway) but because of it's implications, results, response and how they dealt with the situation.

[@ttww1590]

Were Steve setup a new channel for the video as suggest what are the chances it would get a meaningful number of views.

[@Voyajer.]

It would have less than 20 views by this point unless he promoted it, which would defeat the purpose of putting it on a separate channel. Then we'd be here watching ian take issue on it getting promoted.

[@rougenaxela]

To me your response seems quite measured and fair to everyone involved. My overall thoughts: 1) Best wishes to Maddison, and anyone who might find themself in a similar position. 2) I agree with much of your critique of GN's approach, but I am still glad for GN's video bringing attention to a few genuine problems that I don't think were being addressed adequately. I also hope Steve & GN take note of your critique too. 3) Fanbases need to chill and not get so tribal. 4) All in all, I hope all involved can come out of this stronger.

[@roberthowie]

Thanks

[@patrickc888]

This video took a long time to come out, and it's very clear why. A lot of good points presented in a more dissertation-like methodology. While no one here is perfect, even Dr. Cutress, level headed discussion like this that is more slower paced and thorough is definitely needed in a complex situation like this one. Cheers! (And yes, as others have pointed out, thank you for the clear and concise call-out of the situation with Madison, the former employee.)

[@eubenhadd3300]

It does seem that you are holding Steve to a higher standard that Linus, presumably because of what Steve says he wants to do. At the same time I was left wondering at the end.. sure, Steve did go hyperbolic, but.. what about Linus and his flippancy?

[@Mountain-Man-3000]

Linus holds the doc in such high regard, not surprised Ian's leaping to defend him. The lack of objectivity here is astounding.

[@kr0gan105]

I love Steve and GN but I’ve sometimes found myself feeling he’s being petty when describing certain things. Also comes across very condescending.

[@Saltyoldguy-]

IMO it cheapens an argument. There was no problem with making a 15 minute video about the big mistakes and the billet labs stuff. But when you make a 40 minute video about every tiny detail they got wrong, it just feels like you're fluffing a hit piece.

[@dongordon2754]

I felt while watching GN's video that it reminded me of their MSI Killshot video lol

[@pablolarreategui9489]

True the thing he throw into the rails Linus knowing he had issues with the accuracy of his owns reviews reveal he surely didn’t like getting called out and planned get a viral hit a Drama. Btw “that wasn’t the point” it’s a dishonest statement at the end of the day they live from this if a video goes viral it’s really good for them. In this case GN got all the winning cards

[@alyssacrypto]

@@pablolarreategui9489 The idea that GN brand directly benefits from how much LMG suffers from this callout can't be ignored is a bias for GN to be incredibly brutal and uncaring to the target. They are acting like watchdogs and who put them in charge of the industry? They are basically just attempting with hatchet journalism to assume this role in the wider community. It guarantees higher views. But done via bringing down OTHER content creators, is not ethical to me.

[@pablolarreategui9489]

@@alyssacrypto 100%

[@nathanacreman7517]

I enjoyed the video and found it very accurate to the points I have tried to make on other forums, but more articulate. I do have a little contention, the assumption of allegation to be true before the facts are reviewed is also the exact same as assuming someone else's guilt before the facts come out. Therefore, it is very important to not only hear both sides of the story but to see the actual evidence before assuming anything to be true. That's not to say that she's not to be taken seriously, or that LMG or LTT should not go through the process of verifying and investigating those claims. There is a difference between being sympathetic to the victim and being a fool and creating a new victim by not doing the proper fact finding necessary.

[@yanrunze08]

my problem is not LTT made mistakes, the auction is not even that a big deal. The problem is their actions after they made mistakes, their attitudes against criticism.

[@erictourangeau3651]

Merci!

[@thebigsdog]

overall i like your take but you also make miscalculated critiques of GN with your benefit of hindsight. EG 1:30.24 when steve released the original video, billet were not guaranteed compensation, they lost a 3090 and their prototype, plus all the negative publicity on the original video, hell no one from LMG even bothered to reply to them. The public perceptions of the billet vastly would have been based on the original video, and the sentiment changed a lot after the GN video. GN weren't going to wait for 6 months for billet to go under to release the video, nor did they have time to give the financials of billet a once over. Also, you have made a statement the company isn't ruined in your definition. Have you reached out to them to find out if this incident has not "ruined them"?

[@realpetertdm1382]

The part about not reaching out to comment was explained very well IMO. Steve doesn't 'have' to contact LMG for comment, of course. It's not a law or anything. It's just that every investigative journalism organization worth their salt does it. There's a reason why "X declined to comment/did not respond to requests for comment" is such a common line in journalism. Steve didn't do the due dilligence in this case, no matter what his reasoning is. The whole 'reaching out to comment' detail might seem like a nitpick, but IMO it is absolutely not. It's something very important that can change the reader/viewer's perception of events. LMG could have provided crucial information or context in this case, i.e clarifying that they originally were told that they could keep the waterblock, or explain that they were aware of the issue and were in the process of rectifying it? Not reaching out and giving LMG a chance to respond is a huge oversight on GN's part. They *can*, and *should*, do better.

[@hassaan3861]

No, not really. As a former journalist myself, the times you ask companies, countries or individuals for comment solely depends on the situation. Judging an outlet on whether they reach out for comment is only a tech things because of how lucrative it is and how "bro fo sure" culture penetrates the whole tech industry. I remember writing a piece on Israel's invasion of a Palestinian camp in 2003, why the fuck would I ask Israel for comment while covering that? Does that automatically make my journalism any less valid?

[@hassaan3861]

You don't reach out for comment when discussing public, well known facts. Go take your fanboyism somewhere else.

[@Diegorskysp17]

Indeed. If anything, it would have been nice to have LMG respond about the sponsorships and the Framework situation as well (which, IMO, is already pretty clear: Linus personally doesn't review other laptops and nobody reviews Framework's). The way GN framed it certainly puts all that in a negative light.

[@realpetertdm1382]

​@@hassaan3861 This isn't 'fanboyism', lol. Is Dr. Ian Cutress a fanboy, by your standards? The person with 11 years of expereince in the industry (more than you and I will ever have, most likely) is being a fanboy? Is everyone else who pointed out the not reaching out for a comment thing a fanboy? Stop trying to frame everyone who has an issue with GN's coverage as a 'fanboy', it doesn't work and only makes you look bad. GN was *NOT* discussing public, well-known facts. Billet Labs situtaion was not known until GN made it public - your examples don't apply here. GN's video was investigative, and covered new facts and information previously not known to the public - it is absolutely vital that GN reaches out for comment in this case. You call yourself a former journalist, but you don't even understand the current situtation - while claiming that other people (including journalists and experts) are fanboys for pointing out a very obvious flaw in GN's coverage. I can't say anything on your claimed credentials, but there is one thing I can say, and it is that you need to learn about the situation before commenting. People might take you (and your clamied credentials) more seriously if you actually learned about the situation at hand.

[@wesleyfilips7052]

False sexual assault accusations can result in equal damage to the accused as actual sexual assault. If prosecuted you are presumed guilty until proven innocent and can result in financial ruin, incarceration, broken families, and permanent unemployment. You should never take an accusation at face value. Trust but verify. Studies place false accusations at 10% on the low end. I would prefer 10 guilty men walk free than 1 innocent man incarcerated. Just recently a man who was incarcerated as a teen was released after new video evidence exonerated him, and his accuser has seen no jail time.

[@cippo1995]

Apparently he has a 5 letter word for you thinking about stuff "you shouldn't think", but he blames others "for not being professional".

[@gerbil7771]

Very well thought out and put together video. I believe the best one so far on this issue.

[@apkosmic]

Let me understand. Small testing and review groups should be held to a higher standard of accuracy because large corporate testers have more complex processes to deal with. Seems a bit counterintuitive to me. But my livelihood isn't dependent on these groups so maybe I'm less understanding.

[@LiraeNoir]

Yes, that part of the script wasn't that good. I would think that Ian was talking about this idea of "re-shooting to just change a couple of sentences takes literally 2 minutes", and explaining why it's incorrect, but was so lost in this detail that he didn't put the proper context around it. Being bigger with way more money (even relative money) is not an excuse to make inferior work, the expectation should be the opposite. He also used the Billet video too much as an example for this problem, because in that case the issue wasn't a re-shoot half a week later, the issue was Linus refusal to stop the shoot for a few minutes while they go dig into the warehouse for a 3090/ti to test with. That was the "$500 cost", it was the delay during the shoot, that Linus deemed unnecessary to pay because he pre-judged the product.

[@Mickulty]

As someone trying to fully listen to and understand this video, I find parts of it impossible to parse. I had to go back several times *and* turn on subtitles when I hit "I should point out that Steve states in this part of the video that, though they are rushing, and this rushing is causing significant and frequent testing errors, but is clouding the ethical judgement". Later on I've bumped into "He cites issues leading up the path, but by any measure of connecting dots end to end he does not do the final connection, which ultimately means again we fall back on Steve showcasing opinion before we hear evidence, but presenting it as fact. This is Steve applying his own logic, kind of which we all do, but to a sequence of events and coming to a conclusion presenting to millions of viewers. This view is one that you may also share." You did write a script, right? As a longtime anandtech reader I'm used to your writing being a lot better than this, Ian. Anyway - up to the point that I've reached, the broad thrust seems to be that Steve is injecting opinion in a way not befitting an investigative journalist - failing to meet standards set out for "any objective analytical piece". However, I'm not sure why he should be held to those standards? Characterising his LMG video as an opinion piece would seem pretty accurate to me. You say the way the GN video is set out "was considered, historically, an egregious overstepping of the journalist's role compared to say an opinion columnist" as if that's a criticism. Is it not, in fact, accidentally finding the correct standard to hold it to? A core claim as well seems to be that GN have failed to prove a causal link between a rushed schedule and errors in released videos? I don't think they even attempted to do so, but I suspect they considered it blindingly obvious. I'm not sure what the alternative proposition is. I think LMG staff are highly competant and would be capable of fantastic work given enough time. My other comment at this stage is in relation to the proposal that "Any objective analytical piece should start with defining the problem, presenting the data, explaining the data, but then offering up an opinion - kind of like a research paper." - I would suggest that on youtube the similarity to a research paper should go one step further and include an abstract. Yes... that means putting some opinion at the start.

[@jgorres]

I may have noticed some of the issues with GN/Steve's video that you critique here, but I don't recall anything specific. What I do remember is the takeaway I had from GN/Steve's video, which was the frequency of errors pointed to a significant quality problem, and the handling of those errors raised questions about LMG's ethics, including their often stated "concern for the consumer" (their audience). The Billet Labs situation has all that, and a bag of (TechTech) Potato chips.

[@DavidMohring]

Horace Greeley (1811-1872), from whom we get the phrase "Go west young man", stated thirty years later in 1871 "This Daniel Boone business is about played out.". Any expanding company comes with growing pains, but Linus Sebastian's haphazard attitude has become a growing pain.

[@jvandervyver]

I don't get it, why is it relevant to compare a big media house to small one. I was all for your story until that point. That isn't an excuse. That is a "you" (the company) problem, not a customer problem. It is irrelevant how large LTT is. All this tells me is I shouldn't trust big media houses because they have an inferior process and quality control. Why should they be held to a lower bar. That argument comprised a significant portion of your story and it is irrelevant. If I call something an "unboxing" then review it and say piece of garbage. (ie. drew conclusion based on perceived performance). How is that not a review. Again anything you said beyond that is just not something I could give serious credence to. You are building an argument on sandcastles in a lot of your talk here. Like if it was an unboxing, but it isn't. Irrelevant, they did a bad review. I think also that doubling down after being called out and then further lying and doubling down further after being called out more is something you haven't mentioned once here. Somehow you nit pick and nit pick on Steve and some of it deserved. But the absolute doubling down by Linus and his group even with evidence of, totally fine. Lastly the part about lost sales. Please. That is the argument that companies that make chemical dumps make. "Show me how that led to increase in cancer". At best it is morally questionable.

[@bertramstier2540]

I am glad you made this content. I hope a lot of people that just jumped 'on either side of LTT or GN' watch this, and learn about objectivity, claims, statements, data, opinion and... well... tribalism; and apply these lessons not only to this specific instance.

[@dryster123]

It is a shame that the same amount of thought and effort did not go into the last Indiana Jones movie.

[@bertramstier2540]

@@dryster123 it's a shame it did not go in 'raiders of the lost arc' in which the main protagonists action did not alter the main heartbeats of the story.

[@cj09beira]

"he should have put the video in a new channel" - Really now... And its seems no one cares about such fundamental things such as presumption of innocence.

[@theduck17]

Every argument was a bit much. The fact that Steve said what the issue was THEN presented evidence bothered Ian too...like he's supposed to present the evidence then conclusion? Not everything is an academic thesis or news article. I liked GN's presentation and believe he stated LTT's videos were already causing harm so he didn't go for a comment first, and knowing how Linus stating he is already in contact with Billet Labs, for example, but it only occurred AFTER GN's video went live. Steve's style fits KZbin, Ian's is for grad schools.

[@Validifyed]

​@@theduck17it's called "poisoning the well", where you tell people what to think before you present the evidence, thus increasing the chances that they interpret the data in the way you want them to. Intentional or not, it's very bad journalism.

[@Real_MisterSir]

19:08 I would not include this deduction, as it appears to be a gross subjective view that isn't based in anything tangible - you could take a sample size of reddit posts and easily make up your mind to think "a lot of the audience here would want to see Linus publicly shamed for this", to which I'd ask: Really? Who are these people? I have been on multiple forums and comment sections of relevant videos, and while these people do exist, they are in a vast minority and I don't see the basis for making their standpoint a noteworthy topic of discussion. What I would say, again from observation, is that the vast majority simply want to see (what feels like) a sincere apology and acknowledgement of what Linus did wrong, but more importantly, what steps he personally is taking to make sure things improve in the future (since he's the owner and public face of LMG, so ultimately all responsibility ends up with him, regardless of whether he was directly implicit or not). 33:25 Why are you pointing out the average growth of the LTT subscriber growth per month? Growth as a term is multi-faceted, and can come in many forms. For a small channel, growth means increasing their reknown and their outreach, to grow the potential viewerbase. For a large corporation like LMG -in which LTT is a cornerstone of, their growth is not in increased outreach (as they have more or less saturated the available market already with 10s of millions of subscribers) - their growth is instead on the active viewer count per month, which is achieved not by adding new subscribers, but by feeding more content to the existing subscribers and non-subscribed watchers. This also leads to growth through algorithm favoritism and the hunt for getting as much content out as possible before anyone else. Your point of reference for growth is utterly irrelevant, and I do not understand why you even mention that aspect of growth, leading me to believe you don't really understand the intricacy of what you're discussing. When you have access to direct quotes from employees who outright say they wish they had more time to focus on quality, and didn't have to constantly rush everything. While Steve is correlating the context with his points, it's very important to make the distinction of what is presented as conclusive data, and what is presented as a raise of concern. Steve on multiple occasions makes it very clear that he is raising a concern, not a conclusion. He lets the arguments speak for themselves for the most part, and draws correlative assumptions as clearly as he can with the context that is available (in the light of gaining more context being arguably unreasonable since reaching out would more likely than not yield no additional information than what is already publicly available). 36:49 I do not agree with your take, and I believe you are rephrasing the intention of Steve without actually analyzing what his wording means. You are interpreting it how you see it, but at the risk of being hypocritical (which you pointed out you might be). While Steve is simplifying the concept and thus having a broader reach, just the fact that it's broader doesn't make it any less valid, especially when you have no access to a company's bylaws or a direct insight into the founder / ceo's philosophy of running the company, in the end you just have to treat the company as its own entity and paint it with the broader stroke. Doing otherwise with potentially limited data for specification, leaves you with few options. All you can do is point at the things that are going wrong, then point at the likely causes, to finally draw into question the motivation of the corporation as an entity - because that's what it is. Inevitably, if not kept in check during growth, the corporation entity tends to construct a will of its own based on all the puzzle pieces that are moving independently within it. When everything can no longer be micromanaged top-down, and the proper compensative agents are not established, the company will often end up running on its own as a natural derivative of how it was set up from the beginning. So calling into question the motivation of the corporation is a very valid point to strike, and being broad is necessary because it's the corporation as an entity that is being called into question, not necessarily any individual person that would demand a higher degree of nuanced specification. 44:00 I do not agree on this particular take at all. Steve (as a representative of GN) have publicly stated a year prior, that they will be treating LMG and its affiliated sub brands, on the same level as any other tech related corporation, specifically due to their size, outreach, and scope of products and services on offer. This is highly relevant to why Steve calls out LTT and LMG as a whole, and not doing the same for other content creators. It's a very clear distinction coming straight from size and influential power associated with LMG - and in this sense GN does call out other comparable corporations for various things. If GN did call out multiple channels in the tech content creator space specifically, that would be more of a vendetta vs content creation as a whole, rather than looking into one company in particular. Also added to this, is the sheer amount of concern points that are raised with LMG, where one can easily deduce that if only one or two points were present, there would not be grounds for a big public talk - and this is specifically why even small and large points are grouped together in one video. Looking at some elements in isolation may make them look insignificant, but rather than being insignificant, they instead here become supportive to the main points that are made, with larger points being the spearheads of the concern that is raised. So I entirely disagree. Steve / GN do call out entire industries when possible. You just fail at identifying the right industry. You also fail to identify the corporation entity, but instead falsely claim that Steve went after a single individual. This is simply put, wrong. He does criticize Linus in some parts, but only as supportive reasoning for the bigger entity that is the LMG corporation as a whole - which is NOT an individual. It is also NOT a representation of the industry specific to what you are referring to (which is tech content creation industry). You fail to discern LTT and LMG, and use one to equate the other. Steve uses LTT's main pipelines as a reason why LMG as a corporation is facing major internal hazards. He is not going exclusively after LTT, he is basing LTT's framework as the underpinnings of a large portion of the hazards that are found all over LMG. 45:00 Newegg and other companies got "special treatment" because the data was hard to verify. With LMG, the necessary data was already provided - so what really is the difference here? What is the special treatment? If the issues are genuinely raised out of concern, then we must take every factor into consideration - which includes potential personal conflicts that could arise if direct confrontation was made. Imagine it compared to reviewing a product: Case 1, the company knows that a reviewer is buying it so they package it to higher standards than average - or case 2, you perform the purchase incognito so there is no risk of a personalized experience, and what is presented actually represents the real use case scenario. GN in this case is doing two things at once: 1 is raising concerns for LMG about their practices in hopes that they can change their ways, and 2 is raising public awareness about data hazards and calling into question the most established media house in the content creator tech space. 5 channels with double digit millions of subscribers, 25 released independent media posts per week, when most of it can be called into question due to the sheer magnitude and influential potential from reputation and outreach. In general, there isn't anything that stands out from how GN has always presented things, and I say presented with specificity, because Steve is the main face of GN and for the viewers his work is primarily seen as the presenter. Steve's presentation of journalism has not drastically changed in this documentation of LMG, apart from the points I already made earlier, to which I gave reason. Steve also states on multiple points, that this reporting is not easy for him to make, as he states he IS personally conflicted (otherwise this wouldn't be hard for him to do). So it is more than fair to assume, that how the data is presented, vs what is presented, simply represents GN's findings vs Steve's expression of these findings, which ultimately is subjective as a result of his personal conflict. This part is not to excuse, but to explain. The first thing Steve did, personally, was put up a major disclaimer. One that he reinforces multiple times throughout the video. His disclaimer is that he is personally conflicted. This disclaimer tells us, the viewers, that the presentation of content may be influenced by this personal conflict. I therefore hold his content and means of presentation to the bar of his own disclaimer, rather than a comparable non-conflictive reporting of a comparable tech company. The disclaimer also highlights a reason for Steve to not reach out. Personal conflict and bias specifically with the one person whom he has contact with (and even if he didn't contact Linus directly, you know for a fact that an investigative email from Steve would be forwarded directly to Linus regardless of who at LMG initially receives it). So in a case where all evidence is already public, where the content is about discussion and highlight rather than further investigation, and there is a disclaimer of personal conflict - in this case there is, in my view, absolutely clear merit for doing the investigative journalism different from what we may have seen when related to other companies.

[@trivolous28]

You seem to dismiss the idea that LTT should be held to the same standard of accuracy as other tech reviewers because they're the "fun" channel. I absolutely disagree. When viewers watch your reviews, there is an implicit trust from viewers that you are doing the correct things. We the viewers don't have the time or the tech know how to review and judge your findings. It's exactly like in science where peer reviews are conducted by experts before findings are released to the wider audience consumption. With that in mind, I think it's totally fair for Steve to call out LTT. I see Steve's video as a kind of peer review that serves to bring up the quality of the initial manuscript. It *is* bad for the tech reviewing landscape for LTT to get away with having low quality reviews while pumping out videos after videos because it sets the low standard for the rest in the tech media, grabbing the lion share of the profit and starve out the rest who are trying to uphold the high standard.

[@TechTechPotato]

Bear in mind I'm not suggesting there's two bars here - one for Linus, one for everyone else. I'm saying everyone has a different bar. It's all very well for Steve to call out LTT, but I would hope he would present in the order of issue -> data -> conclusion -> opinion. He doesn't, and as I showcased in the video, uses specific wording to disguise opinion as fact, and opinion gets sprinkled throughout. You mention the implicit trust from viewers for accuracy and honesty - in the same light, viewers also have an implicit trust that what they're being presented is a fair analysis without deflection or manipulation along the way. We all do it, to different degrees, however I felt it was worth highlighting in this case specific examples used in the context of analysing other reviewer data.

[@trivolous28]

@@TechTechPotato Yea it's not a purely objective piece - there's a little of admitted retaliation mixed in otherwise he wouldn't have put in that intro. But by the by I find Steve's main message reasonable: that there's a rushness in LMG that likely harms consumer and tech media. Putting it in let's say another channel would have reduced the reach of the message so that's why he had to do it.

[@nukedathlonman]

I hope we can all learn and grow from this with a better understanding of a number of things. Thank you!

[@Fernando-ek8jp]

While I agree with a lot of what Steve said, I did find the amount of "If everyone was just like you" type comments incredibly worrying.

[@lachlanokeefe8020]

For the Madison stuff- I don't think anyone should claim that she is lying, because that would be very unlikely and she'd have to be actually insane to put herself in such a position for little to no good coming to her, but I also think it is fair to not impart judgement on LTT when we have no evidence of anything at the moment.

[@haxie4516]

Oh absolutely. I may be misinterpreting things, but to me, Dr. Cutress' statement there was less to say to pass judgement on LMG, but rather to accept Madison's allegations and support her. Something that echoes his earlier statements of things not always being black and white. In a situation like this, it's not a case of being on "Madison's side" *OR* on "LMG's side" but rather that Madison needs support, and treat LMG no differently until more information comes out. To me, supporting Madison doesn't mean I condemn LMG, nor does it mean that I'm saying they're innocent of everything. It simply means that I'm supporting Madison, and that's what, in the end, is the first priority.

[@lachlanokeefe8020]

@@haxie4516 thanks for the reply- that makes a lot of sense

[@haxie4516]

@@lachlanokeefe8020 No worries! As I said though, that's how I interpreted it, and I may be misunderstanding it, but it seems to align with the rest of Dr. Cutress' statements

[@locarnus255]

46:52 Talks about Steve stating that he approaches his GN video as objectively as possible, while consciously or subconsciously injecting his opinion all the time. Forgets that he himself did exactly what he accuses Steve of doing in this very video...

[@Mountain-Man-3000]

It's infuriating. Doc thinks he's beyond reproach. What a twat.

[@nrees87]

Lol, simp harder and maybe the driest host on KZbin will notice you.

[@locarnus255]

@@nrees87 Talking to yourself? At least put some effort in and present a fake argument, like the author of this video...

[@pistonsjem]

another comment and you would've gotten a free modmat.

[@RobertoBlake]

This was extremely well thought out and well delivered and you’re right about the precedents in journalism and written work. Well said.

[@lordtyroxx]

I work for a fairly large production company with offices in around a dozen countries dealing with meal preparation videos. One of our editors misspelled Avocado in a video that went live. Fired. Another editor didn't know that fridge has a "d" when refrigerator doesn't. Fired. We used to have a team of QA people to check for black frames, misspellings, social requirements, etc, but they were all let go because it added too much time to the schedule and they cost the company (startup at the time) too much money. Making mistakes does happen (especially when Premiere doesn't have a built in spell check). But the fall-man will never be someone higher up even though production speed, QA presence, and budgetary limitations are decided by higher ups.

[@haxie4516]

TIL that refrigerator doesn't have a D in it

[@O.Shawabkeh]

That start-up I surely won't wish them the slightest good luck.

[@ashblossomandjoyoussprung.9917]

​@@O.Shawabkeh Something people don't really understand well is that, if someone established like Disney has a mistake in their movie (bad CGI for MODOK, for instance) it's funny, and people are much more willing to overlook it, or even meme on it, because of the work they've done to establish themselves. Companies that are just starting out don't tend to get that level of forgiveness from the public. It's something you see a lot with small content creators where making pretty small mistakes immediately loses them subscribers, gets them flooded with comments pointing it out, and halts whatever momentum they have, while bigger content creators often receive a flood of support and even gain subscribers and momentum from their mistakes. I think the reason is that, if Linus has a typo in his video it feels good to be like "I'm such a good person. I'm gonna defend him against the Grammar Nazis being mean to him," but for a random guy named Joey with 20 subscribers, people are like "This guy didn't even edit his video properly? He's never gonna amount to anything," and just leave.

[@O.Shawabkeh]

@@ashblossomandjoyoussprung.9917 I see your point clearly and do appreciate your time putting it.

[@voyagerrock1137]

That's the kind of thing that causes mass shootings...

[@arouraios4942]

42:22 What do you mean by "it's simply not the case"? Are you saying he's not nervous, he's nervous but smiling because of another reason, or are you saying he's not a nervous smiler? Because these are all the ways I can think of to interpret those sentences. What you're saying sounds a lot like the implied allegation of malicious intent without any reasoning given. Confusing, since you argued most other points pretty well and elaborately.

[@dr4gonstear]

9 months later and the investigation into bullying and sexual harassment claims are so false the company could sue Madison for defamation. However they have chosen to just leave it and move on. You wouldn’t need to add a correction, but just putting this here.

[@tobiashughes8181]

I disagree, that lion comparison is terrible. She was SAYING the lion mauled her when it didn't. You dont have to make sure shes safe, she wasn't in the lions mouth. It was an allegation. So we beat te lion till we proove it innocent?

[@MarcsSpark]

I'm really glad that you made that video. As someone who tries to think critically and tries to have all the data before coming to a conclusion, i agree with a lots of the points you made in that video. I have talked about the situation with multiple people and have tried to make them think beyond the surface. As an example, i tried to make people understand the implications of reshooting a video for a correction by making them about all the things that happen behind the curtain and that it's not as easy as taking a camera and reshooting a part of a video. I'm really glad that someone can bring those points to lights, and I'm also grateful for the analysis of Steve's video and wording as i find that a lot of people listen to what he says and take it as gospel even tho he has is fair share of wrong in this situation. P.s, english is not my first language, so you'll have to excuse me if some of this comment doesn't make total sense. I'm just really glad to have an outside unbiased analysis on the matter.

[@ZandarKoad]

So wait, did Tech Potato reach out to GN and LTT for comment before publishing this video?

[@LeonimuZ]

He literally says in the video that he reached out to the new LMG CEO for comment.

[@ZandarKoad]

Timestamp?

[@ShiroKage009]

Any idea where one can watch the panel where Dr. Cutress discusses the issue with sponsors?

[@TechTechPotato]

It's part of the LTX exclusives on floatplane. I was planning on recording a react/explain video of the panel, before all this came about. I still plan to, although if I do it soon I know I'm going to get some backlash from all of this - I mean, more than before.

[@ShiroKage009]

@@TechTechPotato you won't get that backlash from me at least. I understand that the content was part of a paid event so maybe it won't be easy to sort that part out. Man do internet fandoms suck.

[@interrobangings]

​@@TechTechPotatoNo matter what you do, you *will* face backlash from people who live parasocial relationships with their fave content creators.

[@interrobangings]

​@@ShiroKage009>"man do fandoms suck" >One Piece pfp considering you're part of one of the longest-running fandoms, I imagine you've seen some horrors

[@ShiroKage009]

@@interrobangings I've been part of the anime fandom since the mid 2000s, and yes I've seen some horror stories. But nothing compares to modern fandoms now that being terminally online is a personality trait.

[@ChrisJackson-js8rd]

critical thinking is the root of all trust ❤

[@TheHellraiser125]

42:25 I have liked what i have seen so far, but i dont know how to take this tidbit of info. How does steve simply smiling have anything to do with his claim of him not enjoying the process? Does a smile always equate to joy? Its even worse when you acknowledge that there is a thing such as nervous smile and etc beforehand. Also, im pretty sure theres alot of arguments to be made to critique GN and Steve in particular but this imo was an incredibly weak point that should not have been made. You have made several good points and some i disagree with but this particular (idk what to call it) thing, was not needed. Will watch the rest and see how it goes. 1:22:37 Okay i have to disagree with this point here. The whole issue with the pwnage mouse was that the MAIN feature of the mouse was tested the wrong way. Also the distinction between an "Unboxer" and a "Reviewer" is almost the same as Linus when he said he "Auctioned" it versus it being "Sold". What constitutes as an Unboxing video and what counts as a Review Video? If a person is either praising or critiquing the features of said product while showcasing that they used it, i'd say that counts as more of a review than it does as Unboxing. The rest of the video is not of discussion either. They simply had tested the product the wrong way, Were told they did it wrong and denied that they made a mistake. Then acknowledged after further pressure that yes, they did indeed made a mistake but it was the fault of the manufacturer not providing sufficient instructions. Also implying that they might not have known as they are not tech savvy enough to realize that there is a plastic film underneath the mouse while they are working in a tech youtube channel is also not a strong argument. I would say that being hired in a company as LMG would mean that you have some if not basic understanding of computer accessories. And if you are NOT knowledgeable enough to make strong critiques of any product that is showcased, then shouldnt it also be told to the audience that the showcase being made is not under the assumption that the tester is knowledgeable and understands how this tech works? It is incredibly easy to assume that any offshoot channel based off LMG/LTT would know about tech and are experts in it. The audience would take their word for it until proven otherwise which is harder during a time when there is a lot of cult following of famous groups and people. 1:27:00 You have the right to decline, but this doesnt at all resolve the issue that linus and LTT in association is a much larger group of media than most of other techtubers COMBINED. Their viewers and the engagement they receive is FAR more than most other tech channels. When GN raises this point, it points out how erroneous data is harming the CONSUMER more than others. Also this DOES harm GN in a way as well. As im sure youve seen the general audience and how youve went ahead and called them "idiots" lol. They are quick to attack those who do not align with the beliefs that they have adopted after watching or listening to someone in social media. The damage that erroneous videos from LTT can easily outweigh the goodwill of GN and any other techtuber simply due to the sheer size of LTT/LMG in general. The power dynamics are massive. "If someone is doing it wrong, then its your duty to do it right". As my points above, GN simply cannot always fix LTT mistakes and constantly try to repair the damage they do. This is also keeping in mind that LTT wants to move away from just wacky entertainment that concerns tech to Doing hardcore analysis and deep dives into how it all works with the recent $30Million dollar lab Investment (Correct me if im wrong on that). Which is why GN called them out (literally). You cannot move onto a BIGGER production platform while you are making many mistakes and errors while in the current production plan. Alright, seent the whole video now. There are some points here that are absolutely on the money here but the ones i have the most issue with is highlighted above. The PSA point couldnt have been more accurate. While most of your video is actually providing context to the point you want to make, this particular point of yours is the strongest here. Also the implication of hiring the Asus employee thing is also fairly pointed out. If steve had an issue with LTT not bashing ASUS for the mistakes they had made at that point (SOC Volt issues in their motherboard and voided warranties on the installation of Beta update that fixes the issue) then he simply shouldve just called that out rather than underlining the "potential bias" that 'COULDVE" happened. It definitely is a weaker part of steve's video if not outright wrong. I appreciate the time and effort you took to make this video. Keep it going man. We need more objective based discussions like these more in the tech consumer media in specific.

[@Mountain-Man-3000]

Oh come now. Doc is OBVIOUSLY smarter than everone else and a master of human emotion! Seriously, the majority of his "points" are just asenine.

[@TheHellraiser125]

@@Mountain-Man-3000 I wouldnt be so quick to discard them, however this is just a full mixed bag of GREAT opinions with HORRIBLE opinions combined into one. We do need more solemn discussions like these and well thought out conversations concerning this to help make it better.

[@Dex2R7]

1:14:40 Thank you so much for mentioning this! Steve is not the authority to tell people they can't review a product because they have a vested interest in it. As long as the person is up front about that they are sponsored or invested it's up to the viewer to decide if they will consider their information valid. SO MANY KZbinrs review products they are sponsored by. Where are Steve's videos about them? Steve's video was undoubtedly malicious and whether you agree if LTT "deserved" it or not, no one can argue that it wasn't extremely biased. It was a crystal clear blatant smear piece on Linus as a person and LTT.

[@soulmuse6129]

I really appreciate this video for finally giving voice to a series of thoughts I've had bouncing around in my head since the original GN video, but struggled to fully articulate.

[@PapaVanTwee5]

I've had similar thoughts, not just on this hit piece, but every hit piece Steve has done.

[@runninginthe90s75]

According to GN shills LTT is doo doo But GN is "based". While actually both of them are in the wrong. I'm glad to see someone like Dr Ian have balls to called out GN bias.

[@joemarais7683]

I’m sorry, I can disagree more with your pt 8 statements. If a media outlet that reaches millions puts out data on a day one review with the first slide being the 4090 being over twice as fast as it actually is, there is 0 chance that did not mislead people to purchase the 4090. You demanding data points for this that you know are unobtainable, and your unwillingness to even entertain a super extreme probability as reality, is highly questionable.

[@emlyndewar]

First half of the video 👍 Second half 👎

[@meikgeik]

You must be new to media. Media makes glaring mistakes ALL the time and their retractions are essentially just fine print in some vague corner of their coverage.

[@ChristopherWoods]

With respect, I disagree with your assertion from 42:13 that Steve is "smiling quite heavily" - it's more of a half-grimace with stressed raised eyebrows and forehead furrows, which is not how a face appears when smiling naturally. I'd suggest his is more of a slightly-pained, wistful look.

[@Salan156]

Halfway through and while I agree with most of this video and your points, you pointing out that Steve is smiling at 42:12 while he sais he doesn't enjoy making the video and acting as if that proves he does is weird and quite honestly one of the most weird takes i've heard. Because the way Steve smiles while saying that is like the smile i'm giving my friend while I tell him that "I didn't want to be the one telling you but you have a shit stain on your pants".

[@Mountain-Man-3000]

Ian thinks he's an authority on human behaviour. And a pompous one at that.

[@Bourikii2992]

"Why not put it on a new channel" Where no one would fucking see it lmao???

[@TechTechPotato]

You don't think it'd blow up the same way lmao????

[@Voyajer.]

@@TechTechPotato Who would find it? KZbin has terrible discoverability. He'd need to signal boost it via a tweet or community post but then that would invalidate the point of putting it on a new channel.

[@brian177]

Did the interview with new CEO ever happen?

[@jgorres]

My guess about why Steve didn't reach out to LMG for comment before publishing the video has to do with LMG being the extremely well liked, 500lb gorilla with a cult-like following in the tech KZbin space. The other, even larger companies that he had asked for commentary before publishing content about were not so well liked, and didn't have the ravenous fan base that LMG does. Was it right? While not technically right, according to your points about "investigative journalism", I will not fault him for it in this instance.

[@TechTechPotato]

I can consider that a valid point - perhaps not a persuasive point, but a point nonetheless. It's a shame you're the one making it, not Steve.

[@lookitsrain9552]

I agree with most of your points, but i think Linus/LMG have used their channel performance (revenue) as a defense often enough to make a good assumption that they are willing to sacrifice quality and accuracy to achieve these goals. GN's biggest issue overall is steve injecting his opinions into the piece without properly separating it out from the rest of the script. Other than the errors on the LTT channel, Short Circuit has been my biggest issue by far, is it a review channel or unboxing channel? Why are the host making statements on whether a product should be bought or not, while another video does not. In my opinion it feels like they use that channel as a way to make content on items that they think will not fit into the main channel, but want to profit from it. Its not a technical channel, but there have been some videos made on that channel that are just blatantly misleading and or safety issues. Biggest issue for me personally was the ankermake 3d printer, it felt like an advertisement for a printer that has objectively bullshit marketing (constantly boasting speed while using an inferior movement system that causes print artefacts). It's also a safety issue, as they use offbrand (clones, known for blowing up) power supplies sitting in the base with minimal airflow. Overall, they just read off the marketing, did a basic unboxing/inspection, barely used it and said it was better than expected, when objectively its not, its a terrible buy.

[@ronaldhunt7617]

Two major points, well three the third being "Who cares?" or who should care, is this something you want to join a team on? Is this going to impact anyone life other than the parties involved? This is not global warming, war, or even a presidential election it is a spat between two youtube influencers (if you detect a slight tinge of disdain you are perceptive). Whoever is right will not effect your life, are people so vapid that this is one of the biggest concerns in their lives? Does anyone watch tech news and reviews to get involved in petty drama? You had GN and LTT each giving takes, then all the top tier reviewers chimed in, followed by the lowest tier of techtubers -the ones that show clips from the other shows and sum up what other creators said. The next is that you cannot ignore history. Everyone involved has a history Steve has gone after others before whether it is a product, company, competitor or an individual, this is not even the first time Linus was the target. It is a good bet that Steve knows this will increase views and subscriptions and damage Linus. This provides motive though there is strong suggestion that the primary reason for the video was the result of Steve being butthurt, why show the clip of some LTT guy mentioning GN by name as the lead clip in the piece? Jealousy, vindictiveness, views, a savior complex may have all been at play. Linus made the big mistake of not fighting back (the warranty issue) which only served to embolden Steve. GN is not even in its own lane, they review hardware and industry news -not other reviewers or competitors and that creates its own set of ethics questions. The final point is more to your commentary than Madison, this absurd notion that the victim (if a woman or minority) is always right and can not be questioned and that even doing so makes you a POS. Every single one of us has been bullied or abused either mentally or physically. Likewise, each of us has been accused falsely or made a scapegoat. Your rhetoric might be based on differing legal systems, based on clues in the video and accent alone I infer you are from the UK where the accused must prove their innocence, in the US the state (or company/HR) must prove your guilt. When discussing something as serious as sexual assault the consequences for the accused even if entirely innocent are severe and can ruin a life. I would agree the first thing is to make sure the victim is okay first, no qualms there, The second point we would most likely agree on is the accused if guilty should be punished severely -we just disagree with everything between those two points. I do not know any of the people involved but there are red flags in Madison's story that cause me to question her side, and since she has given a side it appears to many that is all that matters, the other side is automatically to be presumed guilty. In your coverage, you do seem to do the very thing you chide Steve for using insults and appealing to feelings to shut off disagreement.

[@richardashton8224]

I like both GN and LTT content. But to me, they are not comparable, and I watch them for different reasons. I have always viewed LTT content as TechUtainment. I don't watch it for serious reviews or for there testing of a particular product. They are fun, that's it to me. I enjoy watching some of the crazy things they do with tech. Some of them have even inspired me in projects. I have seen a video, and thought that the idea was good, even if in their own words, the execution of that idea was jank. I have looked at it, and thought it might be worth doing properly. GN on the other hand, I watch less of, and not just because of the less content he pushes out. He is one of the many sources I will go to for reviews when I'm looking at purchasing a bit of tech. However, I would never rely on a GN review alone, I rely on multiple sources. Because of this, I tend tom only really go to GN content, and my other sources for reviews, when I am looking at a purchase, and then only search out the reviews of the things I am considering purchasing. Neither of these takes anything away from the other. But also to me, makes the two not really comparable.

[@AndersHass]

LMG probably doesnt gain new contacts with Terren but it does seem like he wants to improve the relations, like being more constructive in the decline to an offer so it perhaps could be turned into something they can accept instead of being closed off forever. If GN wants to avoid any conflict of interest it would do them good to not have sponsors from any company that has any association to what they review. I understand people accept the way they handle it but so does people for LMG which might do Steve some good to understand. Anyway looking forward to both LMG and GN’s responses. I also like you got Linus/LMG to say transfers/s instead of Hz when it comes to memory (possibly also other people/companies).

[@etherealmistlc]

Brands will (usually) end up working with ltt no matter what. They have a massive reach. Period. They have trashed an Intel product only to have the very next video be a $5000 Intel sponsor video. I feel LTT has proven they will not take a sponsor or will negatively review a product publicly many times, and they still come back.

[@haxie4516]

​@@etherealmistlc Tbh, yeah. That's kinda why I like some of the ways LMG handles things. They aren't afraid to straight up call out their sponsors for being dicks. They have a lot to learn and a lot to improve, but that is one aspect that I can definitely support LMG on

[@AndersHass]

​@@etherealmistlc brands still send them laptops even though Linus has invested in Framework, lol. The example I used with Terren is some company that wanted pay for a review or something along those lines. Where it could be possible that could be turned into paid showcase or something instead or they review the product then does some other content they sponsor.

[@ComputerGeeks-R-Us]

@AndersHass I totally understand where you're coming from. Terren is a bit more mature and has a better understanding of how to manage a relationship, rather than being abrupt. There was a more diplomatic way to handle the situation (with the vendor coming away with the same understanding that LMG doesn't do that) by discussing alternative opportunities that would be advantageous to both sides without compromising LMG's principles.

[@emiliskog]

Minor nitpick the billet labs video was written and cohosted by Adam not Alex something that makes a difference since Alex C at least has more experience with water-cooling and the like as opposed to Adam who this is seemingly his first or second water cooled build

[@TheDenOfTimbsStudios]

I have to disagree with you on people not necessarily believing the allegations, because in the US and Canada, every excuse party is considered innocent until proven guilty, because that’s how you stop false accusations from spreading and destroying the lives of innocent people. With that said, as someone who has been sexually harassed at work, I do believe she is telling the truth. I honestly think you should be careful with who you are calling the problem as you may just take away from her creditably in this situation.

[@alienb1212]

Thanks, Ian, for a comprehensive and well thought-out response. I'm glad you weighed in.

[@lennartmook9182]

@50:00 "...your pacing and wording will be interpreted in advance..." that´s pandering / frameing and i dont see how its even related to neutarl fact based journalism?

[@ArdgalAlkeides]

When criticizing Steve mentioning the guy from ASUS, you failed to mention that he says this because he thinks there is a potential for at least the appearance of bias and conflict of interest. The fact that he calls the guy "marketing director" may be only the partial truth, but really that matters little, the point is "ASUS" and that he was fairly high up.

[@Steamrick]

I own the Stormbreaker Mouse (unit 0202/5000) and I did not see the plastic film on the feet until several minutes of wondering why the friction was so high. The plastic film is not obvious.

[@SangaPommike]

I'm only 20 minutes in, and I don't follow Dr Cutress too often; however, the video seems like just a narration of a written article. It doesn't seem to flow like I'd expect from a video-first piece of content. Not to say the writing seems bad. It's just that written media requires a somewhat different tone and pace compared to an audio-video presentation in which this is presented.

[@dudaseifert]

1:30:18 the whole video felt off to me, but right here is the nail in the coffin: do you honestly, actually, truly believe that steve fron GN needed to prove that a video(any video) with millions of views will influence people's purchasing decisions? Come on, Ian

[@xkm1948]

His bias is so obvious he does not even bother to hide

[@javiej]

Steve didn't start all this, he just reacted to an unfair and unprovoked critic made in public and coming from his more direct competitor, the LMG Lab. And not even from Linus or any of the main heads , but just from an common employee that was given the chance without any justification. I could imagine myself having a similar reaction. And about Madison, her accusations are indeed very serious and an investigation is absolutely required. For the rest of us, we have to wait for that investigation to conclude and see how LMG manage this case rather than giving uninformed opinions anticipatedly. Because emotional reactions like shown in this video (which contains some parts with highly emotional motivations , not different than those that Linus has been critisiced for ), and without having first hand information is irresponsible. Most of us (including the author of this video) hate sexual harassment, and precisely because of that we shouldn't give uninformed guilty veredicts in advance. Because it does not help the victims at all, it is quite the opposite.

[@locarnus255]

36:52 Accuses Steve of making a "broadly sweeping, generalized, non-specific and a somewhat simplification to the obliviousness of what a content production for Linus Media Group is" statement, by making a "broadly sweeping, generalized, non-specific and a somewhat simplification to the obliviousness of what a content production for Gamers Nexus is" statement....

[@amrrahmy123]

I don't agree with everything said here, i actually disagree with more than i thought starting this video. it's about the frequency of the errors and the rushed productions. Before GN's video, as a viewer noticed most of the errors highlighted and most of their CPU and GPU video reviews had errors and I didn't trust their charts as it mostly differed from the rest of reviews online. Pwnage and Billet labs reviews is a demonstration of negligent behavior and bias. and you misrepresented the point made by GN. The reviewer did primarily mention the high friction as a big factor.